Archives for August 18, 2019
Hard is difficult. It is also firm, solid, densely packed. Hard is protective, a shell is hard. Hard to hear, hard to see, hard is a challenge to overcome. What seemed hard at the start can now be easy, like playing an instrument or doing Sudoku. Hard can be fun too, like when I take on a hard puzzle and find the answer (feels good). Hard times are when ordinary things were difficult, like during a war
Something can be hard, in the mind, and thus becomes hard in reality. When I believe tying my shoes is hard, that can be a real challenge. Then Grandpa shows me four different ways to do it and now the only hard part is to choose one to use. Perception of hard, brings hard with it. Grandparents find different things harder than grandchildren do. These two groups ought to talk more. There would be less hard for both
I can be hard in my stance on a particular topic or rule. We start work at 8am, period, not a minute later. That can be hard to like for both the one making and keeping the rule and the ones who are trying to live life around it. Hard edges on furniture or cars or… most things, can be dangerous if I hit them as I go by. Most things are nicer with a bit of softness around the edges. Including personalities
Hard speaks to resilience and consistency. I can be hard enough to withstand temptation. Some would say bravo. Some would call me a hard-nosed, uhm, something. To be unyielding can be helpful, people will count on me, and stressful, people are counting on me. To be hard in my expectations of you, that can be tough, hard. And… it can be a compliment to believe in each other so strongly. Can be
To be hard core is to believe through and through and to act accordingly, always, and, a host of other must do and must be requirements. Hard core will discount anything other than what it believes is the core worthy of being hard core about. The list of requirements can be lengthy and the backlash from other hard core types if I venture even a little bit out of the lines, not good. What is between hard core and soft core?
is seeking an outgoing – responsible individual to work in the Pro Shop.
The successful person will need to have good knowledge of computers, able to handle money, customer service, able to think on your feet.
This position is available from 24 – 40 hours a week,
beginning September 1, 2019
The wage would begin at $14.00 and could be higher based on work experience.
Send resumes to:
or drop off directly to the Pro Shop
at 6891 Tucelnuit Drive, Oliver BC.
250-498-2880 Ext 4.
Recently a column in ODN by Stuart Syme discussed a very personal subject, that of abortion, and the policy of various countries’ legality of obtaining the procedure. Such a subject can never be resolved as we all have our own beliefs on the rights and wrongs of the process.
My immediate gut reaction is that any stage in a pregnancy means you are carrying a child, not a foetus, not a blob but a child.
At nineteen I found myself pregnant and unmarried but, immediately the news was shared with my boyfriend’s family, arrangements were made for a wedding. No ifs, ands or butts, the matter was taken out of our hands and we were marched up the aisle, with me wearing my blue dress of the sullied bride, no white lace for the sinner! My own mother was so ashamed that she ignored the whole event and didn’t speak to me until after the birth, didn’t attend the wedding and didn’t even send a card of acknowledgement. Luckily Dave’s parents were more liberal and took me under their wing as if I was their own daughter. We struggled for many years but fifty five years later we are still together with four children, nine grandchildren and three great grandchildren.
How different would my life had been if I hadn’t had the support of my wonderful in-laws and a partner who thought that marrying was the right thing to do.
I can’t imagine going through with a pregnancy if I hadn’t had such support, if the father had denied any responsibility in raising a child, if I had been alone to cope with the future. In 1964 abortions, if obtainable in England were certainly not mentioned, I would have had no knowledge of how to obtain a termination and, most likely would have had to obtain an illegal procedure if I had to go that route.
My husband’s sister also found herself pregnant several months later, she had an illegal abortion, nearly died in the process and was in hospital, recovering when our first daughter was born. Although I found her parents so wonderfully supportive of me, she was too scared to tell them she was pregnant and nearly died by having a termination. This young lady was of sterner stuff than I and, when she married several years later, it was in a white dress with all the bells and whistles, and why not? I only wish I could have been of sterner stuff and had insisted on a white wedding, but I was just glad to get it over with.
My personal thoughts have always been against abortion, but when an unwanted pregnancy arose in my family I kept my feelings to myself and was relieved that the family member had the choice. Would it have been my choice, no but I put up no resistance to the idea. Years later I wonder how she feels about her decision as a teenager, does she wonder about the child she could have had? Probably she does but I have never mentioned it, it was her decision to make and live with and I hope she is at peace with that.
Why should anyone interfere with a woman’s choice to bear or not to bear children? Such a personal decision should be left to the woman and her doctor. Unwanted pregnancies will always be with us, it is a very sad fact but I truly feel the choice should be left with the woman. I believe that government and public opinion has no place in this matter.
I am so very thankful that I never had this decision to make for myself. Every time I look at my eldest daughter, my heart is filled with love. This wonderful human being was once a blob, a foetus who could have been washed down a drain, instead she brings joy to all who know her. Thankyou God for the support I received so I never had to make this awful choice.
I am truly blessed.
Continuing my search for a candidate or a party, I’m looking at security this week. According to the Public Safety Canada web site, “The first priority of the Government of Canada is to protect the safety and security of Canadians both at home and abroad.” Within all of the publicly available documentation including web sites, annual reports, policy statements, plans, and legislation it is obvious that our Federal Government sees security as counterterrorism. Do I? I’m still thinking about that.
The major changes to the Canadian Security and Intelligence Community (CSIC) have been the products of Liberal governments starting with Trudeau-Senior’s Bill C-157 (1983-4) and Trudeau-Junior’s Bills C22 and C59. Looking at the what, how, and why could help me make my choice for the next election.
The primary purpose of C-157 was to remove responsibility for national security from the RCMP and to create CSIS. The roles of Department of National Defence (DND) and the Canadian Forces (CF) – two separate entities – were unchanged. Personally, I found the Trudeau-Senior legislation unnecessary but mostly harmless. It was pure politics and arose from the McDonald Commission (not MacDonald). C-157 was opposed only by the NDP.
The legislative foundation of counterterrorism then went largely unchanged until 22 June 2017 – two years ago – when Royal Assent was given to Bill C-22, “An Act to establish the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians” (NSICOP). Bill C-22 was adopted on 4 April 2017 by a vote of 167 to 128 – Liberals and Greens versus Conservatives, Bloc, and NDP. Our current MP did not vote. It established the super committee based upon what the UK model used to be but not what it is today.
The UK model used to be, and the Canadian model is today, a Committee of Parliamentarians (COP). The members are chosen by the PM and the COP reports to the PM. The UK model today is a Parliamentary Committee. The members are chosen by the Parties and the committee reports to Parliament. The difference is huge! The UK made a deliberate, thoughtful change based upon their experience.
Bill C-59 “An Act respecting national security matters” followed on 21 June 2019 – two months ago. C-59 implements significant changes and it is a difficult read. C-59 would not have happened without C-22 and NSICOP. Bill C-59 was adopted by a vote on 11 June 2019 by a vote of 155 to 93 – supported by the Liberals and the Greens, opposed by the Conservatives, the NDP, and the Bloc Quebecois.
Bills C-22 and C-59 from Trudeau-Junior are, in my opinion, both unnecessary and harmful. The fact that both were written and passed during a single Parliamentary mandate – largely without fanfare – is without precedent. The fact that Bill C-22 was the direct result of a Liberal Party election pledge tells me that I was not paying enough attention five years ago.
I question whether there should even be a super committee. The old accountability structure for our big three: CFINTCOM (part of CF, roots back to 1941), CSE (under National Defence since 1975, roots back to 1946), and CSIS (under Public Safety since 1984, roots in the RCMP Security Service from 1950) worked.
Why did the Trudeau-Junior government want C-22, NSICOP, and C-59? They said oversight, accountability, lawfulness, and privacy. Same for Trudeau-Senior in 1983. I’m not convinced. The Liberal Party of Canada – by their actions while in power – and the Green Party – by their votes – are making it really difficult for me to vote for either of them in the coming election. We have fundamental differences over security legislation, policy, purpose, and practice. NDP and Conservatives both voted as I would.
I’m still looking.